pippin
Guest
iirc yes?
Calling it a reboot will net them more money even if they fail hard compared to a remaster.I know, I meant 'remake' when I said 'remaster'.Its not a remaster anymore.
That was SS2.I thought you could even hurt yourself by running into walls too fast.
Regarding optimism - a good original game requires the devs to do at least one thing extremely right. A good remake requires the devs to do nothing wrong (compared to the original).
This here is promising, because sticking to the original this closely pretty much ensures the latter. They leave themselves very little room to fuck anything up.
Also there are many industry veterans responsible for timeless classic who come off as bumbling fools whenever they open their mouths to speak game design. And if they say all the right things, then chances are they did or would do something else about monumentally wrong without even understanding the magnitude of their fuck-up (like Deus Ex: Invisible War) or that it was a fuck up at all.good evaluation overall, however one correction: apparently according to the AMA they do have collective industry experience. Experience is overrated anyway. Many great games back in the day were made by relative newbies.
plenty of opportunities to fuck it up
You can fall from the top of the tower in the Security level and not take fall damage.
TriOptimum
I last replayed System Shock with a mixture of PSX Doom and Doom 64 tracks playing in the background. (lifts up asbestos-enriched greatshield in preparation for flamethrower attack)The generi-survival horror score is a poor replacement for the original game's tracks. Stop tampering with the good stuff!